성폭력범죄의처벌등에관한특례법위반(13세미만미성년자준유사성행위)
All appeals by the defendant and the prosecutor are dismissed.
1. Summary of grounds for appeal;
A. Defendant 1’s misunderstanding of facts (guilty in the judgment of the court below) is the fact that the Defendant had the victim’s sexual organ at the time of the instant case, but there is no fact that the victim’s sexual organ was her butt.
Nevertheless, the judgment of the court below which found the whole of the facts charged of this case guilty is erroneous by mistake of facts.
2) The sentence of the lower court’s unfair sentencing (two years of imprisonment, etc.) is too unreasonable.
B. Prosecutor 1) misunderstanding of the legal principle (not guilty part of the reasoning of the judgment below) Defendant at the time of the instant case was in a state of loss of body and body or impossibility of resistance.
In recognition of this situation, even if the victim was at the time when the victim was faced with his/her sexual organ and her sexual organ with his/her sexual organ and her sexual organ, but actually, the victim did not have a mental or physical loss or resistance in view of the crime as a whole, even if the victim was at the time when the victim was faced with his/her sexual organ and her sexual organ.
It is difficult to conclude that the defendant's act can be recognized as a means of action.
Even if an impossible attempt to commit family affairs or quasi-feit act is established, the number of copies of forced indecent act under the age of 13 should be recognized together, and the lower court omitted its judgment.
The lower court erred by misapprehending the legal doctrine by arbitrarily and formally interpreting the crime as a whole without viewing it as a whole, thereby not guilty of this part of the facts charged.
2) The sentence of the lower court’s improper sentencing is too unhued and unreasonable.
2. Comprehensively taking account of the following circumstances acknowledged by the evidence duly admitted and investigated by the lower court as to the Defendant’s assertion of misunderstanding of facts, the Defendant could sufficiently recognize the Defendant’s her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her her
subsection (b) of this section.
Therefore, the defendant's above assertion is without merit.
(1) Circumstances and circumstances concerning the facts charged by the victim in an investigative agency.